HL Deb 09 January 2003 vol 642 cc1143-5

3.16 p.m.

The Earl of Onslow

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether communication systems within the Armed Forces are operating satisfactorily.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Bach)

My Lords, yes. Our current capabilities are fit for purpose—as demonstrated in recent exercises and operations. We need further to develop our communications capabilities to exploit advances in technology and to enable networked capabilities.

To this end, we have in place a comprehensive programme of investment. Bowman will enter service progressively from 2004, as the Clansman system is phased out. The Skynet 5 military satellite communication system will enter service from the middle of the decade.

The Earl of Onslow

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the Bowman system, as mounted in tanks and armoured cars at present, gets hot, burns out and needs to be changed at rear level even in English winter conditions? Therefore, how is the system not going to burn out in the Iraqi desert? Is the noble Lord aware that regiments earmarked for the Iraqi campaign are now loading up their lorry parks with more Bowmans so that when they burn out, which they inevitably will, they can change them?

Lord Bach

My Lords, I think that the noble Earl inadvertently said Bowman, but I think he means Clansman. I shall answer the question accordingly. There are, of course, problems operating any radio equipment in hot desert environments—not just for Clansman. Clansman continues to perform as required and, of course, will be replaced by the highly capable Bowman system from 2004 onwards—a programme that continues to make excellent progress.

As I mentioned to the House before the Christmas Recess, a number of urgent operational requirements are currently being procured, including communication systems. For obvious reasons, I am not prepared to help any possible adversary by going into any more detail on the specific capabilities.

Lord Campbell of Croy

My Lords, does the noble Lord recall the communications problems that arose in operations in former Yugoslavia which were raised in this House at the time? Does he agree that it is essential that the British Army has systems which are strong and reliable, especially when hostile transmitters are creating interference on the airwaves?

Lord Bach

My Lords, I agree entirely with the noble Lord. Of course we are determined that that will be the position if and when our troops have to engage in warfare.

Lord Methuen

My Lords, can the noble Lord confirm that the new Bowman system will not only provide communications between military units but also with the other services and, in particular, aircraft?

Lord Bach

My Lords, yes, I can confirm that. The Bowman system will be an excellent system. I must say that it has had a rather long and tortuous history until now. If it had not been for my noble friend Lady Symons, when she held the position that I hold now, we might still not know when Bowman would be coming into operation.

Lord Vivian

My Lords, last Tuesday, the Secretary of State in another place gave the assurance that Her Majesty's Government are working on a process of ensuring that combat identification is dealt with satisfactorily. Will the Minister tell us what new equipment will be available in time for any potential conflict in the Gulf and confirm that these IFF systems will be fitted to all armoured vehicles?

Lord Bach

My Lords, before answering the noble Lord's question, I know that I speak for the whole House when I welcome him back to his rightful place on the Front Bench. I look forward to facing his questions over the next weeks and months. I do not want to make my welcome too effusive in case I am mistaken.

As regards his important question, we take combat identification and the risk of friendly fire extremely seriously, as does he. Lives depend on it. We believe that our combat identification procedures are effective. We have deployed successfully as a country on many operations since the tragedies in this field during the Gulf conflict. There have been no reported incidents of what is described as fratricide, or blue on blue, involving UK forces. I say that with caution because whatever technology one puts in and however sophisticated it may be, these things sometimes happen.

In the event of military action, British troops will be fully interoperable with United States troops for combat identification. That capability, including new equipment options, are currently being procured.

Lord Marlesford

My Lords, how can the Government contemplate committing British troops to action with armoured vehicles which are fitted with Clansman when Clansman is, first, unreliable and, secondly and more important, insecure in two crucial respects: it lacks digital encryption and the frequency-hopping capability which prevents enemy forces from tracking and attacking vehicles? Do the Government recognise that, if our troops are committed to the Gulf and there were to be casualties as a result of the inaccuracies of Clansman, Her Majesty's Government would hear a grave responsibility?

Lord Bach

My Lords, perhaps I may say to the noble Lord and to the House that of course we are not going to send Armed Forces, if it comes to that, anywhere in the world unless there are proper communications which are as safe as possible. Urgent operational requirements are in line and items are being procured as we speak in order to ensure that the communications system works as well as can be expected.